This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Visible-light-driven photocatalysts are predominantly useful for converting solar to hydrogen energy via photocatalytic water-splitting reactions. The heterojunction composite materials have exhibited remarkable advantages for visible-light photocatalytic H 2 evolution. We have successfully synthesized MoO 3 @ f -MWCNT and MoO 3 @ g -C 3 N 4 nanocomposites and characterized them using PXRD, UV-DRS, Raman spectroscopy, XPS, PL, TRPL, FE-SEM, HR-TEM, BET, and photocurrent. The photocatalytic water-splitting efficiency of MoO 3 @ f -MWCNT and MoO 3 @ g -C 3 N 4 was measured under visible light (λ ≥ 420 nm) irradiation using TEOA as a sacrificial reagent in DI water and natural seawater. The H 2 evolution rate in DI water for MoO 3 @ f -MWCNT is 2313.56 μmol g – 1 h – 1, and for MoO 3 @ g -C 3 N 4 is 2530.35 μmol g –1 h –1 with an apparent quantum efficiency (AQE) of 6.38 and 6.93%, respectively. In natural seawater, the H 2 evolution rate is 2632.20 and 2845.06 μmol g –1 h –1, with an AQE of 7.21 and 7.77%, respectively. The rate of H 2 evolution slightly increased in natural seawater than DI water. The Tafel slope values for MoO 3 @ g -C 3 N 4 and MoO 3 @ f -MWCNT are 59 and 92 mV dec –1, respectively. The lowest Tafel value of MoO 3 @ g -C 3 N 4 exhibited a faster rate of reaction. Thus, the surface interaction between the MoO 3 and the porous g -C 3 N 4 materials may create synergistic effects, which facilitate electron transport at the interface and significantly boost the photocatalytic activity. Thus, MoO 3 @ g -C 3 N 4 is a promising photocatalyst for renewable energy production.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kangutkar et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: